Louder for the people in the back.
There were a bunch of reasons for this (Roster Construction, Coaching, Covid, Crazy Russian shit, crazy DeAngelo shit, etc) but looking at this roster and thinking "HEY! WHAT WE NEED TO AUGMENT OUR TALENT IS MORE SCORING" is befuddling.
Isn't this a red herring though? Or a straw man? I can't keep my logical fallacies straight.
Point is, who is really arguing that we "need more scoring"?
I think the major argument that almost everyone is making in regard to Eichel, is in regard to a larger argument that we want more young center talent, which goes hand in hand with the "We are apprehensive about giving Zibanejad 7 years at age 29," argument, which goes hand in hand with the "should we be focusing on building around Panarin/Zibanejad/Kreider or Lafreneiere/Kakko/Chytil/Fox?" debate.
It seems to me that advocating for Eichel mostly centers around two concepts (at least that's what I'm steadfastly arguing, so maybe my read of other's posts is tainted in this aspect):
1) Desire for overall better center talent (not necessarily scoring), as most cup winners the past decade and a half have either elite center talent or elite center depth, and
2) Desire for more youth at center so that we have the core to grow with Lafreniere/Kakko/Chytil/Fox, et al.
As I've said in my posts supporting an Eichel trade, first, I'm not emptying the cupboard - I would have a deal centered around, like, Buch/Strome/Jones/15OA. I wouldn't even deal Kravtsov or Lundkvist at this point given his contract and injury uncertainty, but if I can get him for something LIKE that, I do it all day long. If that's fantasy (which it might be to an extent, but I don't think an Eichel package requires anything close to what some have speculated or what Buffalo has asked for), then I move on to other targets. I'm not a huge fan of the Larkin or Lindholm ideas, but I would certainly be aggressive to teams like Florida and Vegas, or other teams who fancy themselves playoff contenders, to try to get shots at guys like Lundell, Krebs, Rossi, Perfetti, Newhook, Vilardi, etc.
Some of those names are well-rounded 200 foot players, not simply "more scoring," prospects.
I think the major idea here is that we have Zibanejad, Chytil, and very little else worth mentioning at center, whereas we have wingers for days.
There is a lot of uncertainty at a position where it's pretty widely thought that you need, need, need pretty high end talent. Are there exceptions? Of course. But the general rule is win with top centers. Or at least that's how you stay a decade-long contender, which is kinda what we are aiming for.
Anyway, Eichel fits in here because he gives us more youth and more roster flexibility in terms of checking off a "long term need" box for those who don't want to be held over a barrel with Zibanejad in 12 months.
I understand there is uncertainty there, in the form of his injury and his existing contract to make you hesitate (though I might argue the 5 years left on that deal make it a positive, not a negative). But what always seems left unsaid is that there should kinda be equal uncertainty if we do nothing but ride what we have.
